Batman's Costume: Ever be Blue & Grey Again?

[Sweet Rabbit]

I like just the plain bat without the oval

 

[wofford29]

Actually, I agree that it was pathetic for Adams (a true legend) to try to be Jim Lee, because the latter is the most overrated comic book artist of our time.

A true legend would have confidence in his own stuff.

 

[thenammagazine]

A true legend would have confidence in his own stuff.

I don't see it being outside the realm of possibility for the editors to ask him to attempt to draw Batman more in tune with Lee's.

 

[Star Puffs]

Even first appearance Batman had blue highlights.

That was the shadowing effect on black to give some semblance of depth. I think I read once SPider-man was also supposed to be black but the blue came to dominate and became the standard.

 

[IrishJedi]

I don't see it being outside the realm of possibility for the editors to ask him to attempt to draw Batman more in tune with Lee's.

Agreed. Especially since Lee is one of the egomaniacal ____heads currently running DC. That sounds exactly like something they would do. But to wofford's point, if this was the case Adams did go along with it, which is a shame. He's a much more historically important artist than that Image-era twat.

 

[Batman29]

It doesn't really matter to me what they change it to now since I don't read comics anymore, but this is the most iconic look he ever had as far as I'm concerned. Adams FTW.

Love this Batman look also, one of my fav's

 

[DFanatic]

Ultimate Batman

 

[DFanatic]

 

[Karnis]

Debating which is lamer. This thread or that joke.

The joke by far.

 

[The Ternes]

I don't really care to see him go back to blue. Not that it matters. As long as Batman is Batman, I'm happy. Didn't the comics switch to an all black suit like in the movies for a while too?

 

[haytil]

I like just the plain bat without the oval

I think the oval is important for contrast - the black symbol on gray fabric is too hard to see (especially if it's at night). Maybe we can see it because it's a comic, but I would think the characters in the book would not be able to see it - so what's the in-character rationalization for Batman including the Bat-motif, if nobody's actually going to be able to make it out?

I have the same problem with the Nolan movie suits - the black-on-black Bat symbols are so hard to make out, nobody would realistically know it was there. So why bother? (Though I like those suits for other reasons)

That being said, the black-on-gray symbol isn't always bad in my book. I like the small version often depicted for the Year One era. It makes his outfit look simpler and more primitive, before he learned and adapted enough to have a more effective, sophisticated suit, which is an effective visual tactic.

What I definitely like least of all is the GIANT black on gray, like the Alex Ross batsuit you posted.

Not only does it suffer the contrast issues, it's also too big a symbol to be seen effectively. Often the cape is going to cover it at the corners and sides, when draped down (which you don't always see, because of the dynamic poses he's drawn in - but I don't think Batman switches instantly from dynamic pose A to dynamic pose B without normal motion).

It also suffers because they're large enough to be affected by the curvature of his pecs, as it wraps around. So unless you look at him face-on, you're not going to see the whole Bat image (since the far side will wrap around his pecs).

So these two above points again raise the question - why bother, if nobody's actually going to see it unless they're in the perfect viewing position (face-on, in a well-lit position, with Batman standing in a dynamic pose so his cape is out of the way)?

 

[filip629]

I don't care if he has the oval or not. So long as he's wearing his black and gray duds, I'm good. I never did care for the blue and gray look.

 

[wofford29]

I think the oval is important for contrast - the black symbol on gray fabric is too hard to see (especially if it's at night). Maybe we can see it because it's a comic, but I would think the characters in the book would not be able to see it - so what's the in-character rationalization for Batman including the Bat-motif, if nobody's actually going to be able to make it out?

I have the same problem with the Nolan movie suits - the black-on-black Bat symbols are so hard to make out, nobody would realistically know it was there. So why bother? (Though I like those suits for other reasons)

That being said, the black-on-gray symbol isn't always bad in my book. I like the small version often depicted for the Year One era. It makes his outfit look simpler and more primitive, before he learned and adapted enough to have a more effective, sophisticated suit, which is an effective visual tactic.

What I definitely like least of all is the GIANT black on gray, like the Alex Ross batsuit you posted.

Not only does it suffer the contrast issues, it's also too big a symbol to be seen effectively. Often the cape is going to cover it at the corners and sides, when draped down (which you don't always see, because of the dynamic poses he's drawn in - but I don't think Batman switches instantly from dynamic pose A to dynamic pose B without normal motion).

It also suffers because they're large enough to be affected by the curvature of his pecs, as it wraps around. So unless you look at him face-on, you're not going to see the whole Bat image (since the far side will wrap around his pecs).

So these two above points again raise the question - why bother, if nobody's actually going to see it unless they're in the perfect viewing position (face-on, in a well-lit position, with Batman standing in a dynamic pose so his cape is out of the way)?

The symbol doesn't and shouldn't be seen. By anyone. The whole argument that its to attract the eye of the criminal so they aim at his chest is retarded and not Batman. Batman shouldn't be seen, he should be hidden in the shadows.

 

[IrishJedi]

The yellow oval works sometimes. Others, it doesn't. It just depends on the material. Not all Batman books & stories need to be edgy and deadly serious.

I love the dark stuff as much as anyone. But, IMHO, Batman starts losing its appeal when it takes itself a little TOO seriously (a line where Nolan comes dangerously close to the edge). Balance is necessary. As much as it's cool to have the ultra-serious, brooding and "realistic" Batman it's also important to remember that at its essence it's just another funnybook about a guy putting on a crazy costume and punching bad guys in the face. It's all rather ridiculous, and I don't mind acknowledging that... so stuff like the yellow oval never phases me.

 

[VintijDroidGutzz]

I'm also a huge fan of the Neal Adams era Batman.. always have been.

Not a fan of the Alex Ross design, the realism in his art is acknowledged, but.. ehh - I prefer his Superman. I dig Jim Lee's Batman too, basically I prefer the blue / grey look really. Love the original Bob Kane strips too!

There's so many versions out there, that it makes your head spin. I guess that's the beauty though, something for everyone.

 

[swiftlikessharpthings]

The yellow oval works sometimes. Others, it doesn't. It just depends on the material. Not all Batman books & stories need to be edgy and deadly serious.

I love the dark stuff as much as anyone. But, IMHO, Batman starts losing its appeal when it takes itself a little TOO seriously (a line where Nolan comes dangerously close to the edge). Balance is necessary. As much as it's cool to have the ultra-serious, brooding and "realistic" Batman it's also important to remember that at its essence it's just another funnybook about a guy putting on a crazy costume and punching bad guys in the face. It's all rather ridiculous, and I don't mind acknowledging that... so stuff like the yellow oval never phases me.

I agree with every word you said there, Irish. And Neal Adams' Batman is legendary. The image floating around the thread is from one of my favorite Batman stories.

 

[DiFabio]

The yellow oval works sometimes. Others, it doesn't. It just depends on the material. Not all Batman books & stories need to be edgy and deadly serious.

I love the dark stuff as much as anyone. But, IMHO, Batman starts losing its appeal when it takes itself a little TOO seriously (a line where Nolan comes dangerously close to the edge). Balance is necessary. As much as it's cool to have the ultra-serious, brooding and "realistic" Batman it's also important to remember that at its essence it's just another funnybook about a guy putting on a crazy costume and punching bad guys in the face. It's all rather ridiculous, and I don't mind acknowledging that... so stuff like the yellow oval never phases me.

That's the thing though how is the yellow oval/badge synonymous with "camp" and non-seriousness? Because of the 60s television show? There's plenty of material and stories out there where Batman sports the iconic oval and those stories are "ultra-serious, brooding and realistic". The chest emblem doesn't even matter.

Look at the movies. Batman had the yellow oval chest emblem in 1989 and it was a serious take, then slowly the yellow oval evolved to no yellow oval (Batman and Robin) to a larger chest bat symbol (Batman Forever Sonar Suit, Batman and Robin, Ice Suit and finally Batman Begins) and now to a smaller bat symbol. In the film franchise Batman started out serious, dark and brooding (Burton) and when he lost the oval it started getting ridiculous and campy (Schumacher had a mix of both) and now it's serious again with a large black bat logo and smaller one (Nolan, TDK).

I like both logos, I don't see how either one of them could bother anyone. They're both great and I really don't think either version reflects the tone of the character. The notion that a black and gray Batman with a large black bat is more serious than a Batman with a blue and gray suit with a yellow oval is ridiculous. There's even combinations of these two looks that make them similar to each other.


The way I see it, in Batman's "history" he starts out with the black emblem when he's a "creature of the night". When more and more people discover that he's not this bat monster and that he's a man in the suit, fighting crime the symbol slowly changes to the yellow oval. The logo just reflects the time of Batman not the character.

 

[IrishJedi]

I don't think the yellow oval is necessarily campy. Of course it can be (and has been) used in some pretty serious, edgy Batman stories. And even in BTAS it worked perfectly, and that series was hardly camp. But it wouldn't work for all Batman iterations. Could you see it being used by the likes of Nolan, or even Frank Miller? I can't even picture that.

 

[DiFabio]

Could you see it being used by the likes of Nolan, or even Frank Miller? I can't even picture that.

Frank Miller used it, he even created a reason for the yellow oval being there.

I could see Nolan using it too but it would probably be smaller (like the TDK chest logo) and gold, not yellow. In fact, I remember thinking back in June of 2007 when we got the first teaser pic of the TDK suit of Batman on the police car that it was a small, edgy bat symbol trimmed in gold due to the angle and lighting. That was speculated for months before we got a clear shot of what we all know now.

 

[IrishJedi]

Damn, I'd completely forgotten that Miller was one of those who came up with the "target" idea!

That reminds me that I need to whip out The Dark Knight Returns. It's been far too long.

Still can't see Nolan going for the yellow oval, though. He over-thinks this stuff just like some fans in an effort to make his Batman as "realistic" as possible.